vikunja/vikunja
6
43
Fork 73
Code Issues 150 Pull Requests 17 Packages Releases 32 Activity

feat: assign users to teams via OIDC claims #1393

Merged
konrad merged 93 commits from viehlieb/api:950_reworked_assign_teams_via_oidc into main 2024-03-02 08:47:12 +00:00
Conversation 34 Commits 93 Files Changed 26 +25 -10
2 changed files with 25 additions and 10 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
Showing only changes of commit aaa090f6bb - Show all commits

18
pkg/modules/auth/openid/openid.go
View File

@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ func HandleCallback(c echo.Context) error {
// does the oidc token contain well formed "vikunja_groups" through vikunja_scope
log.Debugf("Checking for vikunja_groups in token %v", cl.VikunjaGroups)
teamData, errs := getTeamDataFromToken(cl.VikunjaGroups, provider)
if teamData != nil && len(teamData) > 0 {
if len(teamData) > 0 {
for _, err := range errs {
log.Errorf("Error creating teams for user and vikunja groups %s: %v", cl.VikunjaGroups, err)
viehlieb marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
konrad commented 2023-10-18 15:18:17 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

Typo: team and oidc should be lowercase.

Please check the other log messages as well for typos, I've seen a few more like this.

Typo: `team` and `oidc` should be lowercase. Please check the other log messages as well for typos, I've seen a few more like this.
}
@ -224,7 +224,12 @@ func HandleCallback(c echo.Context) error {
if err != nil {
konrad marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
konrad commented 2023-12-01 14:59:58 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

Doing this every time a user logs in probably has performance implications but that's a problem to care about when we'll hit it in the wild.

Doing this every time a user logs in probably has performance implications but that's a problem to care about when we'll hit it in the wild.
viehlieb commented 2023-12-06 13:37:36 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

only if it has teamIDsToLeave, but yeah I agree.

The problem is more the oidc structure itself, that you "have" to check for changes "everytime" you sign in..

only if it has teamIDsToLeave, but yeah I agree. The problem is more the oidc structure itself, that you "have" to check for changes "everytime" you sign in..
log.Errorf("Found error while leaving teams %v", err)
}
err = RemoveEmptySSOTeams(s, u, teamIDsToLeave)
errors := RemoveEmptySSOTeams(s, teamIDsToLeave)
if len(errors) > 0 {
for _, err := range errors {
log.Errorf("Found error while removing empty teams %v", err)
}
}
viehlieb marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
konrad commented 2023-04-17 16:21:36 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

Replace with

if len(teamData) < 1 {
	return
}
Replace with ``` if len(teamData) < 1 { return }
viehlieb commented 2023-05-03 15:09:07 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

It could well be, that only a single team is received through the oidc token.

It could well be, that only a single team is received through the oidc token.
konrad commented 2023-05-06 16:13:14 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

But len(teamData) < 1 will only be true if there are 0 teams received?

I should have phrased it better, this is equivalent:

if len(teamData) == 0 {
	return
}
But `len(teamData) < 1` will only be true if there are 0 teams received? I should have phrased it better, this is equivalent: ``` if len(teamData) == 0 { return } ```
viehlieb commented 2023-05-08 11:43:19 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

yes, that's true of course. i do not know why i read it differently.

yes, that's true of course. i do not know why i read it differently.
👍 1
}
viehlieb marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
konrad commented 2023-02-13 10:25:53 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

This should be an Error log message.

This should be an `Error` log message.
err = s.Commit()
if err != nil {
@ -261,15 +266,18 @@ func AssignOrCreateUserToTeams(s *xorm.Session, u *user.User, teamData []models.
return oidcTeams, err
viehlieb marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
konrad commented 2023-02-13 10:31:46 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

This whole inner loop should be rewritten to something like this so that it's more idomatic go:

tm := models.TeamMember{TeamID: teamID, Username: u.Username}
err := tm.Delete(s, u)
if err != nil {
	return err
}

team, err := models.GetTeamByID(s, teamID)
if err != nil {
	return err
}

err = team.Delete(s, u)
if err != nil {
	return err
}
This whole inner loop should be rewritten to something like this so that it's more idomatic go: ```go tm := models.TeamMember{TeamID: teamID, Username: u.Username} err := tm.Delete(s, u) if err != nil { return err } team, err := models.GetTeamByID(s, teamID) if err != nil { return err } err = team.Delete(s, u) if err != nil { return err }
konrad commented 2023-02-13 10:32:42 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

Also right now you'll only delete the team if deleting the member did not work, which does not really make sense.

Also right now you'll only delete the team if deleting the member did not work, which does not really make sense.
viehlieb commented 2023-02-23 14:58:37 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

changed behaviour to not delete team

changed behaviour to not delete team
}
func RemoveEmptySSOTeams(s *xorm.Session, u *user.User, teamIDs []int64) (err error) {
func RemoveEmptySSOTeams(s *xorm.Session, teamIDs []int64) (errs []error) {
for _, teamID := range teamIDs {
viehlieb marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
konrad commented 2023-02-23 15:32:48 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

Not sure if this is a good solution. Imagine one membership fails to get removed while the others get through. Then there's inconsistent state and the whole thing is not atomic anymore. I think we should instead return on the first error and let the caller deal with it.

Not sure if this is a good solution. Imagine one membership fails to get removed while the others get through. Then there's inconsistent state and the whole thing is not atomic anymore. I think we should instead return on the first error and let the caller deal with it.
viehlieb commented 2023-03-10 12:19:46 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

okay, but won't it reach inconsistent state anyways?
Imagine the user is in 3 groups.
tm is deleted for group 1
tm is not deleted for group 2, because user is last member
tm won't be deleted for group 3, where user is not last member and should be removed.

or do you suggest to catch ErrCannotDeleteLastTeamMember and ask to sign out manually from that specific group(s) and sign out from other groups anyway?

I think it is intended behavior to sign out from teams when possible, and to leave teams as they are, where error is found. Maybe giving a hint to leave manually because you are last user.

Did I understand you correctly?

okay, but won't it reach inconsistent state anyways? Imagine the user is in 3 groups. tm is deleted for group 1 tm is not deleted for group 2, because user is last member tm won't be deleted for group 3, where user is not last member and should be removed. or do you suggest to catch ErrCannotDeleteLastTeamMember and ask to sign out manually from that specific group(s) and sign out from other groups anyway? I think it is intended behavior to sign out from teams when possible, and to leave teams as they are, where error is found. Maybe giving a hint to leave manually because you are last user. Did I understand you correctly?
konrad commented 2023-03-10 16:01:29 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

I think it is intended behavior to sign out from teams when possible, and to leave teams, where error is found.

What's your difference between "signing out from a team" and "leaving a team"? Aren't the two the same?

okay, but won't it reach inconsistent state anyways?

Not if the whole db transaction is rolled back.

> I think it is intended behavior to sign out from teams when possible, and to leave teams, where error is found. What's your difference between "signing out from a team" and "leaving a team"? Aren't the two the same? > okay, but won't it reach inconsistent state anyways? Not if the whole db transaction is rolled back.
viehlieb commented 2023-03-10 16:23:47 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

edited

edited
viehlieb commented 2023-04-17 12:40:17 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

the edit is:

I think it is intended behavior to sign out from teams when possible, and to leave teams, where error is found.

What's your difference between "signing out from a team" and "leaving a team"? Aren't the two the same?

I think it is intended behavior to sign out from teams when possible, and to leave teams as they are, where error is found. Maybe giving a hint to leave manually because you are last user.

okay, but won't it reach inconsistent state anyways?

Not if the whole db transaction is rolled back.

If the whole transaction is rolled back, then it might very challening to organize teams, because if a member sits on a team as last member, then the member cannot leave this team.
The suggestion would be to leave teams, if it is possible -> the team membership, where the user cannot be signed out because of
ErrCannotDeleteLastTeamMember{tm.TeamID, tm.UserID}
should be resolved manually then

the edit is: > > I think it is intended behavior to sign out from teams when possible, and to leave teams, where error is found. > > What's your difference between "signing out from a team" and "leaving a team"? Aren't the two the same? > I think it is intended behavior to sign out from teams when possible, and to leave teams **as they are**, where error is found. Maybe giving a hint to leave manually because you are last user. > > okay, but won't it reach inconsistent state anyways? > Not if the whole db transaction is rolled back. If the whole transaction is rolled back, then it might very challening to organize teams, because if a member sits on a team as last member, then the member **cannot leave this** team. The suggestion would be to leave teams, if it is possible -> the team membership, where the user cannot be signed out because of ```ErrCannotDeleteLastTeamMember{tm.TeamID, tm.UserID}``` should be resolved manually then
konrad commented 2023-04-17 16:14:56 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

to leave teams as they are, where error is found

Ah so "leave a team" in this context is "not deleting / modifying it"? Not "A user leaves a team"?

I guess I'm just understanding it differently :)

if a member sits on a team as last member, then the member cannot leave other teams.

Why would it do that? That's not what should happen, but how would being the last member of one team prevent that user to leave another team?

where the user cannot be signed out because of
ErrCannotDeleteLastTeamMember{tm.TeamID, tm.UserID}
should be resolved manually then

But resolving this manually would mean the user needs to manually remove the team, which they cannot do because the team was created from openid?

> to leave teams as they are, where error is found Ah so "leave a team" in this context is "not deleting / modifying it"? Not "A user leaves a team"? I guess I'm just understanding it differently :) > if a member sits on a team as last member, then the member cannot leave other teams. Why would it do that? That's not what should happen, but how would being the last member of one team prevent that user to leave another team? > where the user cannot be signed out because of ErrCannotDeleteLastTeamMember{tm.TeamID, tm.UserID} should be resolved manually then But resolving this manually would mean the user needs to manually remove the team, which they cannot do because the team was created from openid?
viehlieb commented 2023-11-07 13:41:23 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

if a member sits on a team as last member, then the member cannot leave other teams.
...is edited. I meant: the member cannot leave this team, if it is the last membership.

where the user cannot be signed out because of
ErrCannotDeleteLastTeamMember{tm.TeamID, tm.UserID}
should be resolved manually then

But resolving this manually would mean the user needs to manually remove the team, which they cannot do because the team was created from openid?

I think it is the responsibility of oidc admins to not let a team go blank without coordinating the potential destructive danger of it.
Therefore i would just delete the team + team_memberships.

> if a member sits on a team as last member, then the member cannot leave other teams. ...is edited. I meant: the member cannot leave this team, if it is the last membership. > where the user cannot be signed out because of ErrCannotDeleteLastTeamMember{tm.TeamID, tm.UserID} should be resolved manually then > But resolving this manually would mean the user needs to manually remove the team, which they cannot do because the team was created from openid? I think it is the responsibility of _oidc admins_ to not let a team go blank without coordinating the potential destructive danger of it. Therefore i would just delete the team + team_memberships.
konrad commented 2023-11-07 15:02:36 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

I think it is the responsibility of oidc admins to not let a team go blank without coordinating the potential destructive danger of it. Therefore i would just delete the team + team_memberships.

Okay, that makes more sense.

> I think it is the responsibility of oidc admins to not let a team go blank without coordinating the potential destructive danger of it. Therefore i would just delete the team + team_memberships. Okay, that makes more sense.
👍 1
count, err := s.Where("team_id = ?", teamID).Count(&models.TeamMember{})
if count == 0 && err == nil {
log.Debugf("SSO team with id %v has no members. It will be deleted", teamID)
viehlieb marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
konrad commented 2023-02-13 10:33:56 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

Why not cast this to []map[string]interface{} directly?

Why not cast this to `[]map[string]interface{}` directly?
viehlieb commented 2023-02-23 15:18:41 +00:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

no reason,
had claim VikunjaGroups more agnostic to specific data type.
now casts directly to []map[string]interface{}

no reason, had claim VikunjaGroups more agnostic to specific data type. now casts directly to []map[string]interface{}
_, err = s.Where("id = ?", teamID).Delete(&models.Team{})
_, _err := s.Where("id = ?", teamID).Delete(&models.Team{})
if _err != nil {
errs = append(errs, _err)
}
}
}
return err
return errs
}
func RemoveUserFromTeamsByIds(s *xorm.Session, u *user.User, teamIDs []int64) (err error) {

17
pkg/modules/auth/openid/openid_test.go
View File

@ -187,8 +187,14 @@ func TestGetOrCreateUser(t *testing.T) {
assert.NoError(t, err)
err = RemoveUserFromTeamsByIds(s, u, teamIDsToLeave)
assert.NoError(t, err)
// err = RemoveEmptySSOTeams(s, u, teamIDsToLeave)
// assert.NoError(t, err)
errs = RemoveEmptySSOTeams(s, teamIDsToLeave)
for _, err = range errs {
assert.NoError(t, err)
}
errs = RemoveEmptySSOTeams(s, teamIDsToLeave)
for _, err = range errs {
assert.NoError(t, err)
}
err = s.Commit()
assert.NoError(t, err)
@ -222,11 +228,12 @@ func TestGetOrCreateUser(t *testing.T) {
assert.NoError(t, err)
err = RemoveUserFromTeamsByIds(s, u, teamIDsToLeave)
assert.NoError(t, err)
err = RemoveEmptySSOTeams(s, u, teamIDsToLeave)
assert.NoError(t, err)
errs = RemoveEmptySSOTeams(s, teamIDsToLeave)
for _, err := range errs {
assert.NoError(t, err)
}
err = s.Commit()
assert.NoError(t, err)
db.AssertMissing(t, "teams", map[string]interface{}{
"id": oidcTeams,
})